Forest and Grassland Resources Research >
Introduction performance of nine Picea species in Hohhot
Received date: 2024-12-18
Revised date: 2025-04-01
Online published: 2025-12-04
To identify high-quality Picea resources with strong adaptability in Hohhot,the introduction performance of nine introduced and cultivated Picea species(38-46 years) in the Hohhot Arboretum was evaluated by a model of incorporating growth traits,stress resistance and reproductive characteristics.The results showed that Picea wilsonii exhibited the fastest growth(annual average height growth and annual average DBH growth),while P.purpurea and P.glauca showed the poorest height and DBH growth,respectively.P.crassifolia showed the largest branch diameter growth in the current year,while P.glauca showed the smallest branch diameter growth.P.schrenkiana and P.obovata demonstrated strong stress resistance,whereas P.abies suffered severe dieback.All nine Picea species could flower and produce seeds,but their seed quality varied significantly.Species were classified into four groups:P.crassifolia,P.asperata and P.meyeri(Group I) exhibited high seed embryo rates,germination rates,and overall seed quality;P.schrenkiana,P.obovata,P.wilsonii and P.glauca (Group II) had moderate growth,low dieback rates,but poorer seed viability;P.purpurea(Group III) showed weak reproductive capacity,while P.abies(Group IV) grew rapidly but had low stress resistance.Group I is suitable for large-scale promotion in spruce-friendly zones of Inner Mongolia due to rapid growth and high seed quality.Group II is recommended as landscape species for ornamental planting.Group III requires further introduction trials to assess adaptability.Group IV is not recommended for planting in central and western Inner Mongolia due to poor stress resistance.The findings provide critical guidance for optimizing spruce cultivation.
Li ZHAO , Haidong ZHANG , Shanghua LIU , Meizhen WANG , Hao SANG , Jiatao LI , Fude WANG . Introduction performance of nine Picea species in Hohhot[J]. Forest and Grassland Resources Research, 2025 , 0(2) : 109 -116 . DOI: 10.13466/j.cnki.lczyyj.2025.02.011
| [1] | 贺炯坤, 许贞魏, 施如康, 等. 西天山雪岭云杉不同腐解等级倒木的更新幼苗数量特征及其影响因素[J]. 植物研究, 2024, 44(2):279-288. |
| [2] | 邹星晨, 王欣苗, 左亚凡, 等. 青海云杉不同演替阶段林下草本多样性特征及其环境解释[J]. 生态学报, 2023, 43(24):10285-10294. |
| [3] | 吕东, 张宏斌, 赵明, 等. 干旱半干旱区7个云杉属树种引种适应性研究[J]. 干旱区资源与环境, 2019, 33(5):146-150. |
| [4] | 赵一之, 赵利清, 曹瑞. 内蒙古植物志[M]. 3版. 呼和浩特: 内蒙古人民出版社, 2020. |
| [5] | 赵静英, 蒋明, 赵文英, 等. 塞尔维亚云杉在小陇山林区引种栽培实验初报[J]. 技术研究, 2019(9):80-83. |
| [6] | 祁生秀. 蓝云杉引种区域化试验研究初报[J]. 青海农林科技, 2019(2):101-105. |
| [7] | 金蓉, 杨振, 张拥军, 等. 云杉新品种引进栽培试验示范研究[J]. 现代农业科技, 2018(13):128. |
| [8] | 夏燕, 张建伟, 田开春, 等. 云杉5个种18个种源的早期评价[J]. 东北林业大学学报, 2014, 42(12):1-6. |
| [9] | 冯祥元, 于柱英, 种培芳. 不同种源地云杉的苗期抗旱性评价[J]. 甘肃农业大学学报, 2012, 47(1):95-102. |
| [10] | 许娜, 王军辉, 安三平, 等. 利用混合线性模型对青海云杉无性系生长性状进行早期评价[J]. 东北林业大学学报, 2024, 52(2):25-30. |
| [11] | 安三平, 许娜, 杜彦昌, 等. 云杉种和种源生长性状早期评价[J]. 林业科学研究, 2018, 31(5):20-26. |
| [12] | 黄三祥. 沙地云杉生态学特性及引种研究[D]. 北京: 北京林业大学, 2004. |
| [13] | 李青粉, 王军辉, 张建华, 等. 云杉引种及种和种源早期评价[J]. 林业科学研究, 2012, 25(5):644-650. |
| [14] | 闫婷, 黄海广, 张胜男. 沙地樟子松林天然更新研究进展[J]. 内蒙古林业科技, 2019, 45(2):59-61. |
| [15] | 国家林业和草原局. 中国森林资源报告(2019)[R]. 北京: 中国林业出版社, 2020. |
| [16] | 葛莉莉, 赵文义, 阿腾戈, 等. 云杉花粉生活力及贮藏方法试验研究[J]. 内蒙古林业科技, 2007, 33(4):33-37. |
| [17] | 郭艳兰, 牟德生, 赵连鑫, 等. 国外引入的 18 个酿酒葡萄营养系抗寒性评价[J]. 2023, 37(1):161-168. |
| [18] | 周龙, 杨晓雪, 段晓晨. 6种半干旱地区园林绿化植物综合适应性评价[J]. 林草资源研究, 2024(1):73-81. |
| [19] | 王欢欢, 王晶晶, 陈奇凌. 3种数学方法在灰枣果实品质评价中的应用[J]. 中国农学通报, 2025, 41(7):138-144. |
| [20] | 蔺豆豆, 赵桂琴, 琚泽亮, 等. 15份燕麦材料苗期抗旱性综合评价[J]. 草业学报, 2021, 30(11):108-121. |
| [21] | 陈刚, 吕东, 赵明, 等. 基于层次分析法的干旱半干旱区15 种引进观赏植物适应性[J]. 干旱区资源与环境, 2022, 36(1):186-191. |
| [22] | 朱雅丽, 张景路, 张绘芳, 等. 新疆云杉蓄积与地上生物量模型拟合分析[J]. 中国野生植物资源, 2024, 43(1):100-106. |
| [23] | 安三平, 王丽芳, 蒋明, 等. 蓝云杉、欧洲云杉、白云杉在甘肃中部干旱半干旱区的适生性评价[J]. 林业科技通讯, 2018,(6):11-13. |
| [24] | 高艳如, 王军辉, 麻文俊, 等. 不同种源和家系红皮云杉细根形态与生物量垂直分布特征[J]. 植物研究, 2024, 44(3):380-388. |
| [25] | 王豁然, 江泽平, 傅紫岐. 林木引种驯化与森林可持续经营[M]. 北京: 中国环境科学出版社,1998:165-171. |
| [26] | 李兴芬, 苗雅慧, 孙永江, 等. 青杄 PwPEBP 基因及其启动子序列的克隆与表达分析[J]. 北京林业大学学报, 2019, 41(4):8-20. |
| [27] | 罗芊芊, 周志春, 邓宗付, 等. 南方红豆杉天然居群叶片的表型性状和氮磷化学计量特征的变异规律[J]. 植物资源与环境学报, 2021, 30(1):27-35. |
| [28] | BUCCI S J, GOLDSTEIN G. Mechanisms contributing to seasonal homeostasis of minimum leaf water potential and predawn disequilibrium between soil and plant water potential in neotropical savanna trees[J]. Trees, 2005, 19(3):296-304. |
| [29] | GILL S S, TUTEJA N. Reactive oxygen species and antioxidant machinery in abiotic stress tolerance in crop plants[J]. Plant Physiology and Biochemistry, 2010, 48(12):909-930. |
| [30] | KRAEMER G P, HACKE U G, SCHMID S. Differential stomatal and hydraulic responses to drought in Picea abies and Pinus sylvestris[J]. Tree Physiology, 2019, 39(5):725-735. |
| [31] | 赵丽, 包秀兰, 王福德, 等. 15 种云杉针叶解剖结构与其抗旱性研究[J]. 西北林学院学报. https://link.cnki.net/urlid/61.1202.S.20250402.1432.004 |
| [32] | 韩生慧, 徐先英, 贺访印, 等. 干旱荒漠区几种云杉属植物的生态适应性研究[J]. 西北林学院学报, 2016, 31(5):55-60. |
| [33] | 雷芳. 青海云杉不同生境与结果能力、产种量相关性研究[J]. 宁夏农林科技, 2022, 63(2):16-19. |
| [34] | KREMER A, POTTS B M, DELZON S. Long-term field trials reveal genetic adaptation of forest trees to climate change[J]. Science, 2016, 336(6083):1231-1233. |
| [35] | CLAPHAM D H, EKBERG I, ERIKSSON G, et al. Gene expression during Picea abies seed development[J]. Planta, 2002, 215(4):572-576. |
/
| 〈 |
|
〉 |
